2026-01-09 10:27:16

Why choose Feeling Coding?

The logic is actually very simple—if you truly understand a market and can explain your product clearly in one sentence, then you don't need to pull in an entire development team to share the project's profits.

This is the core idea behind some emerging Web3 projects. A small and focused team, as long as the direction is right, the pace is fast, and the product is clearly articulated, can often iterate faster and seize market opportunities more efficiently than bloated large teams. A concise positioning often means stronger execution and a clearer business model.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

10 Likes

Reward
10
10
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

YieldChaser

· 3h ago

Products that can be explained in a single sentence are indeed more reliable than those with flashy documentation.

View OriginalReply0

ProveMyZK

· 7h ago

That's right, a large team can actually hinder efficiency—that's the principle behind it.

View OriginalReply0

MetaverseMigrant

· 20h ago

Well said, small teams are indeed more agile, just worried about falling into the wrong direction.

View OriginalReply0

BlockTalk

· 01-09 10:57

Well said. The idea that small teams can compete with large teams has indeed been validated in Web3. Being all-in-one can become a burden, really.

View OriginalReply0

degenonymous

· 01-09 10:57

Honestly, small teams are indeed more flexible than large teams, but the premise is really understanding the market NGL, this set of theories sounds great, but I've seen too many one-sentence product projects still end up failing Clear positioning ≠ ability to make money; execution is the real weakness It feels a bit idealistic, but it's definitely more reliable than those PPT projects But the name "coding"... who came up with it? It sounds a bit abstract

View OriginalReply0

AirdropChaser

· 01-09 10:55

There's nothing wrong with that; this is the principle of streamlining and efficiency. Large teams can become a burden. It sounds ideal, but in reality, small teams often fail faster. Products that can be explained in one sentence... the requirements are indeed high, and most projects can't achieve it. Small but refined is fine, but the key is to have real substance; otherwise, all the refinement is pointless. This logic is correct, but execution is the biggest pitfall. Don't just talk without action.

View OriginalReply0

MissedAirdropBro

· 01-09 10:53

Alright, this logic is indeed brilliant. A small, efficient team really outperforms those bloated giants. A single sentence can clearly explain the product, and the dividends should be enjoyed by oneself. I believe in this kind of execution.

View OriginalReply0

LightningPacketLoss

· 01-09 10:52

Products that can be explained in a single sentence truly don't require a bunch of people to maintain.

View OriginalReply0

0xSoulless